I've played all 3 classes through the early part of the game (rogues twice: archer and DW) and I'm thoroughly enjoying the experience. The visuals are dynamic and interesting (copy and pasting maps occurs, yes, but no more than in Origins and some of the vistas in Kirkwall are spectacular [massive gold Tevinter statues, a beautiful sky, soaring buildings above you]). Normal difficulty does seem a bit easy, but I'll finish a playthrough on normal and then try Hard with my next playthrough.
From reading all of these reviews, however, I'm starting to understand why some people are complaining so much:
They, inexplicably, seem to feel that Origins was the best/ some sort of 'classic' example of a western RPG, and therefore that blueprint should be inviolate and immune to change.
In reality, Dragon Age: Origins was a solid game that did some things well (the Origin stories were a great idea, the overall story was interesting, and it was a big game with alot of substance) but other things not as well (combat was intended to be quick and visceral [listen to the devs' comments from before Origins' release] but ended up being sluggish [two-handed weapons], stilted [backstab 'shuffle'] and, at times, boring [once you have the strategy to kill a high dragon set, it's essentially a long, drawn-out foregone conclusion to watch your victory]).
Dragon Age 2 is not (and was never intended to be) a duplication of the original. Bioware saw things in Origins (like the things I mentioned above) and wanted to make improvements that would add more excitement to the game.
So many reactionaries want to say that Bioware 'sold out' (specifically because of EA) to get more 'casual' RPG players interested, but I see this as an example of a small subgroup of RPG players who consider themselves part of a dwindling, elitist niche: the hardcore 'classic' RPG gamer who has revelled in slow, ponderous, repetitive games since said games existed.
Some elements of Origins have been trimmed out, yes. As disappointed as I am that I can't make an elf, now (especially with a more interesting concept of how elves look in this world), I understand that DA2 is trying to tell a very specific story. If it's too specific for some players, I can sympathize with that and recommend waiting for Skyrim or another 'sandbox' RPG. However, Origins was every bit as much of a story 'on rails' as Dragon Age 2, so let's not revise history.
Personally, some of the cuts were clear efforts to remedy an element that didn't work in Origins. As a prime example: Skills. There were combat and story skills (to allow influence or unlock weapon skills or tactics slots for companions) and then there were craft skills. I, and I'm sure I'm not alone, never once took the craft skills or stealing because I couldn't spare the combat/story skills. So they shifted that away from an allocation of level-up points and toward more of a 'find these things and you can buy them' system. Maybe it's not perfect, but why rage about it?
Lastly, some comments like 'now mobs spawn in waves and come out of nowhere, which is totally unrealistic' are just ridiculous. If you actually watch, you'll see that they dynamically jump from rooftops or flood in through corridoors, which looks really cool when it happens and makes encounters more nuanced and intense (although, again, on Normal difficulty that is muffled by the general ease of combat).
It was impossible to make a character jump, at all, in Origins' engine. So, let's see the progress for what it is rather than cringe and rage against change.
Retour en haut
